[Debian-in-workers] Multiple RFSs - Splitting fonts-smc (was Re: Updating fonts-smc and FontForge update)

[Vasudev Kamath]

On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Balasankar C
<balasankarc at autistici.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> [I am subscribed to the list. Need not CC me in replies]
>
> On ചൊവ്വ 15 നവംബര്‍ 2016 09:39 രാവിലെ, Vasudev Kamath wrote:
>> One more thing I noticed you stripped upstream folder using gbp but it
>> will still be present in the upstream tarball. So your justification
>> reducing size still does not hold.

> Are you sure? Because, I just tried cloning the repo and built the package using `gbp buildpackage`. The folder I skipped using gbp.conf was present neither in the
> orig.tar.gz generated nor the upstream branch of the repo. My belief is that it is the orig.tar.gz file that gets uploaded to the archive. Or, am I looking in the wrong
> location?

OK I might have thought filter only filter from master and not from
upstream branch.
Preferred way to repack is either manually or use standard tools like uscan.

And IIRC its always suggested to use copyright to document the repacking.


>> Additionally if you remove some
>> portion from upstream README.source is not the place to mention.
>> Correct way to do is use Files-Excluded: in copyright and provide if
>> required repacksuffix in watch file.

> Is it accepted in copyright format 1.0 ? I read in the page UscanEnhancements[0] that the bug regarding that is still open. So, I feel it is better not to use it until it is
> part of the specification, officially .

Really?. copyright format 1.0 was used for a long time before it got
accepted. It  was refered as DEP-5 at the time.

A quick code search shows how many other packages are already using
it, because uscan is already part of devscripts. [1]. So no I don't
buy your argument on not using it because its not "yet" accepted.

[1] https://codesearch.debian.net/search?q=Files-Excluded%3A+path%3Adebian%2Fcopyright&perpkg=1


> Also, isn't Files-Excluded used to specify uscan to remove the files? Since I am already doing that with gbp.conf, do I need this field?

gbp is just a packaging helper, people might use dgit to prepare
something for your package or some time in future people may start
using git-dpm. Then how do you make sure, people will not miss it?. On
the other hand uscan is common tool used by people to download new
upstream source. (standard tool for the purpose).


>
> Another doubt in the similar tracks is that, do I need to use a suffix? Because, I am removing something from upstream not because it is DFSG-violating, but because
> to reduce the file size (assuming that argument holds). If I have to, what suffix should I use?

dfsg is used when you strip of non dfsg content, there are still other
prefixes people use. May be searching other packages will enlighten
you bit more on suffixes used in archive!.

>
> [0] https://wiki.debian.org/UscanEnhancements




-- 

Vasudev Kamath
http://copyninja.info
copyninja@{frndk.de|vasudev.homelinux.net}